Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx agentmods add skills/evilfreelancer/secs/reporting-security-findingsnpx skills add EvilFreelancer/secs --skill reporting-security-findingsgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/EvilFreelancer/secsWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/evilfreelancer/secs/reporting-security-findings)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/evilfreelancer/secs/reporting-security-findings"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/evilfreelancer/secs/reporting-security-findings.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5 | $0.00066 | $0.03088 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00033 | $0.01544 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00618 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00309 |
Grade A, and why
reporting-security-findings scanned grade A with 1 finding against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 5d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Makes network callslowCapability
Not a fault in itself. Listed so you know the mod talks to something, and to what.
curl -H "Authorization: Bearer $TOKEN" \ This is a copy
100% identical to reporting-security-findings — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 288 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Reporting Security Findings
The report is the product. Findings that are not understood are not fixed, and findings that cannot be reproduced are disputed. Most of the value an assessment creates is destroyed or preserved in the write-up.
When to Use
- Writing up a single vulnerability
- Producing a penetration test, code audit, or red team report
- Submitting to a bug bounty program or triaging inbound submissions
- Scoring severity and arguing priority with an engineering team
- Planning coordinated disclosure for an unpatched issue
When NOT to Use
- Finding the bug — use the relevant testing or audit skill first
- Assembling the raw record a report is built from (provenance, artifact
register, evidence, dead ends) — use
maintaining-engagement-state; this skill consumes that record - Incident narratives and postmortems — use
responding-to-incidents - Compliance-framework mapping as the primary goal — different document, different audience
Anatomy of a Finding
Every finding answers five questions, in this order:
### F-03 Tenant isolation bypass in report export [High]
**Summary**
An authenticated user of any tenant can export reports belonging to other
tenants by supplying an arbitrary report ID to `GET /api/v2/reports/{id}/export`.
**Impact**
Full read access to other customers' report data, including the financial
figures and contact records those reports contain. Any customer account —
including a self-service trial — is sufficient. This is a cross-tenant
confidentiality breach with likely contractual and regulatory consequences.
**Affected**
`api/handlers/reports.go:214` (`handleExport`), deployed in production as of
commit `a1b2c3d`. Reproduced on staging 2026-07-24 14:02 UTC.
**Reproduction**
1. Authenticate as `trial-user@tenant-a` and obtain a session token.
2. Note your own report ID from `GET /api/v2/reports` (e.g. `1041`).
3. Request a neighbouring ID:
curl -H "Authorization: Bearer $TOKEN" \
https://staging.example.com/api/v2/reports/1042/export -o out.csv
4. `out.csv` contains tenant B's data. Confirmed with IDs 1042, 1043, 1055.
**Root cause**
The handler looks the report up by primary key and checks only that the
session is valid. The tenant scope present on the list endpoint
(`WHERE tenant_id = ?`) is absent from the export query.
**Remediation**
Add the tenant predicate to the export lookup, and enforce it at the data
access layer rather than per handler so new endpoints inherit it:
SELECT ... FROM reports WHERE id = ? AND tenant_id = ?
Then audit the remaining 14 handlers that call `findByID` without a scope —
listed in Appendix B.
**References**
CWE-639, OWASP API1:2023 Broken Object Level Authorization
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 5d ago First seen · 288 lines · 66 tokens per session scan A daee5c56c1bf
reporting-security-findings is a skill published in the GitHub repository EvilFreelancer/secs (10 stars, last pushed 27d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 66 tokens to every session and 3,088 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 1 finding (makes network calls). It is 100% identical to reporting-security-findings, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
Blue Team Defense & Hardening
System hardening, detection engineering, security baseline monitoring, patch management, defense-in-depth architecture, and security posture improvement.
wave-issue-coverage
For each DRAFT requirement in a given Ground Control wave (or all waves), ensure a GitHub issue covers it and is bidirectionally linked. Use when the user asks to "cover wave N requirements with issues", "back-fill issues for draft requirements", or similar. Requires the Ground Control MCP and gh CLI.
ship
Ship current branch — CI, SonarCloud, code review, security review, fix all issues, merge. Assumes code is already committed and pushed.
create-huntable-agent
Add a new extraction sub-agent to Huntable CTI Studio as a first-class peer of CmdlineExtract, ProcTreeExtract, HuntQueriesExtract, RegistryExtract, ServicesExtract, and ScheduledTasksExtract. Use this skill whenever the user asks to "add a new agent", "create a sub-agent", "wire up a new extractor", "add a new…
codebase-test-trueup
Audit test coverage gaps and generate unit tests to close them. Use when the user says "test trueup", "coverage gaps", "test coverage audit", "fill coverage", "write missing tests", "backfill tests", "scope tests", "test what I changed", or any request to identify and fill test gaps. Three modes: audit (report only)…
cut-release
Interactive walkthrough for cutting a new release of Huntable CTI Studio. Use this skill whenever the user says "cut a release", "ship a release", "tag a version", "bump the version", "new release", "do the release", "release vX.Y.Z", "ship v5.4.0", "time to release", or otherwise signals they want to move code from…